Protestants and Mary

[elvisman]

You are most likely stretching the limit of symbolism with you claim of ‘the woman’ and Mary.​

Note how the same Hebrew word is used in context:

Ge 3:13 And the LORD God said to the woman <0802>, “What is this you have done?” The woman <0802> said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
Ge 3:15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman <0802>, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel."
Ge 3:16 To the woman <0802> He said: “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you.”
Ge 3:17 Then to Adam He said, "Because you have heeded the voice of your wife <0802>, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’: "Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life.
Ge 3:20 And Adam called his wife’s <0802> name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
Ge 3:21 Also for Adam and his wife <0802> the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.​

Ge 3:21 Also for Adam and his wife <0802> the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.
Ge 4:1 Now Adam knew Eve his wife <0802>, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the LORD.”
Ge 4:17 And Cain knew his wife <0802>, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son––Enoch.
Ge 4:19 Then Lamech took for himself two wives <0802>: the name of one was Adah, and the name of the second was Zillah.​

One doesn’t have to be anti-Catholic to read the Bible and come up with very different understandings about Mary and other things.​

I find it very interesting that you stretch symbolism, yet when there is a clear symbolic statement by Jesus you take it very literal: the wine and bread turning into the Body and Blood of Jesus. When Jesus first offered it to His disciples all His Body and Blood were in tact so the disciples could not have them literally. Jesus spoke symbolically.​

BTW, if Jesus instituted the “Last Supper” with real bread and real wine, why does the Catholic Church use a wafer? I’m sure this is off topic so if you want to move ist somewhere else, I don’t mind.

First of all - you’re going way off track here.**
If you want to start other threads for some of your clims, then please do so.
You and some of the other anti-Catholics on this board have hijacked this thread to argue against a whole litany of Catholic beliefs.

As for the Genesis verses you have referenced - what is your point? You haven’t proven anything other than the fact that you have discovered how to cut and paste. Other than that - I don’t really see what point you’re trying to make.

As for the holy Eucharist - the “wafer” you refer to is unleavened bread - just as Christ used at the Last Supper.

 

[RickHolland]

**Well, Rick **-
That is a well- presented argument – NOT.
Allow me to educate you.

**First of all, nobody is saying that James or the other “brothers” of Jesus were cousins. Those brothers named in Scripture were the sons of the “other Mary“ (Matt. 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25) and her husband Clopas (or Alphaeus). They might have been cousins, step brothers, kinsman distant relations, boyhood friends or even neighbors.

You see – Jesus and his Apostles spoke Aramaic, not Greek. The word for “brother” in Aramaic is “Ach”. This word can be used to describe ANY of the meanings I listed above. Now – let’s move on to the Greek word for “brother” – “Adelphos”.

In the Septuagint, which Jesus studied from – and there are dozens of NT verses that refer to the Septuagint to substantiate this claim. In the Septuagint, we see that the normal Greek word for Brother is used very loosely. For example, Lot is called the “Adelphos” of Abraham – even thought Lot was his nephew (his brother, Haran’s son). Still with me? Good – let’s move on.

In Gen. 29:15, Jacob is referred to as the “brother” *(Adelphos) *of his uncle Laban.
In 1 Chr. 23:21–22, brothers Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar’s daughters married their “brethren,” (Adelphoi, *plural of Adelphos) *the sons of Kish - who were actually their cousins.

In Acts 1:16, we see that there are 120 “Adelphoi” that Peter is addressing. I sincerely doubt that they all had the same mother.Do you see now that you don’t have the clear-cut case you thought you did, my anti-Catholic friend?

Surely you do not believe what you wrote or are you fooling yourself?

First, Hebrew is the language used for the OT; the word Ach is difficult to distinguish because it has a variety of meaning. The NASB and NKJV renders it appropriately; as relative, which can be verified from other passages. This is why it is important to look as closely as possible at the language to which the passage was written and in context of the whole; especially of the Hebrew text.

Second, Jesus studied from the Septuagint, thought He was restricted by to to Aramic…LOL. No; Jesus is the living Word and already knows what was to be written and was was already written. You prove that you do not understand the basic nature of Jesus
Finally, James, which of the three (4 if you count the father of Judas-not Iscariot). Two were apostles, the lesser always being distinguished from the others because he was younger. The James are always distinguished; as for folks such as yourself.
As far as clarity concerning Jesus having bilogical brothers; Scripture leaves little to no romm for debate. I believe anything outside of the Bible concerning Mary brings reproach on her and the Lord.

 

[elvisman]

elvisman;5774451:

**Well, Rick **

That is a well- presented argument – NOT.
Allow me to educate you.

**First of all, nobody is saying that James or the other “brothers” of Jesus were cousins. Those brothers named in Scripture were the sons of the “other Mary“ (Matt. 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25) and her husband Clopas (or Alphaeus). They might have been cousins, step brothers, kinsman distant relations, boyhood friends or even neighbors.

You see – Jesus and his Apostles spoke Aramaic, not Greek. The word for “brother” in Aramaic is “Ach”. This word can be used to describe ANY of the meanings I listed above. Now – let’s move on to the Greek word for “brother” – “Adelphos”.

In the Septuagint, which Jesus studied from – and there are dozens of NT verses that refer to the Septuagint to substantiate this claim. In the Septuagint, we see that the normal Greek word for Brother is used very loosely. For example, Lot is called the “Adelphos” of Abraham – even thought Lot was his nephew (his brother, Haran’s son). Still with me? Good – let’s move on.

In Gen. 29:15, Jacob is referred to as the “brother” *(Adelphos) *of his uncle Laban.
In 1 Chr. 23:21–22, brothers Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar’s daughters married their “brethren,” (Adelphoi, *plural of Adelphos) *the sons of Kish - who were actually their cousins.

In Acts 1:16, we see that there are 120 “Adelphoi” that Peter is addressing. I sincerely doubt that they all had the same mother.Do you see now that you don’t have the clear-cut case you thought you did, my anti-Catholic friend?

First, Hebrew is the language used for the OT; the word Ach is difficult to distinguish because it has a variety of meaning. The NASB and NKJV renders it appropriately; as relative, which can be verified from other passages. This is why it is important to look as closely as possible at the language to which the passage was written and in context of the whole; especially of the Hebrew text.Second, Jesus studied from the Septuagint, thought He was restricted by to to Aramic…LOL. No; Jesus is the living Word and already knows what was to be written and was was already written. You prove that you do not understand the basic nature of Jesus.
Finally, James, which of the three (4 if you count the father of Judas-not Iscariot). Two were apostles, the lesser always being distinguished from the others because he was younger. The James are always distinguished; as for folks such as yourself.
As far as clarity concerning Jesus having bilogical brothers; Scripture leaves little to no romm for debate. I believe anything outside of the Bible concerning Mary brings reproach on her and the Lord.
Sorry - but your cutting and pasting makes it difficult to read your post.
I’ll make it easy for you.
If Jesus had uterine brothers - name them.
Also - please show me ANY scripture that says Mary had other children.

Tick, tock, tick, tock . . .

 

[RickHolland]

Sorry - but your cutting and pasting makes it difficult to read your post.
I’ll make it easy for you.
If Jesus had brothers - name them.
Also - please show me ANY scripture that says Mary had other children.

Tick, tock, tick, tock . . .

Isn’t that part of the idea of using the colors; makes it a little challenging doesn’t it? You expect people to pick through yours; should you not do the same; being charitable?

If you are so weak on Scripture that you are unaware the half dozen or so passages that refer to Jesus having both brothers and sisters, then perhaps before moving along you should read the Bible…what do you think? I have already posted a couple to help get you started.

You cannot refute the truth of Scripture no matter how you try to twist and wiggle; that is why it is truth…right?

 

[elvisman]

Isn’t that part of the idea of using the colors; makes it a little challenging doesn’t it? You expect people to pick through yours; should you not do the same; being charitable?

If you are so weak on Scripture that you are unaware the half dozen or so passages that refer to Jesus having both brothers and sisters, then perhaps before moving along you should read the Bible…what do you think? I have already posted a couple to help get you started.

You cannot refute the truth of Scripture no matter how you try to twist and wiggle; that is why it is truth…right?

My posts may be colorful - but never garbled.

Now - I asked you a simple question. If you can’t answer it, just say so.
I asked you to provide the names of these uterine brothers of Jesus.
CAN you?

 

[Dokimas]

First of all - you’re going way** off track here.
If you want to start other threads for some of your clims, then please do so.
You and some of the other anti-Catholics on this board have hijacked this thread to argue against a whole litany of Catholic beliefs.

As for the Genesis verses you have referenced - what is your point? You haven’t proven anything other than the fact that you have discovered how to cut and paste. Other than that - I don’t really see what point you’re trying to make.

As for the holy Eucharist - the "wafer" you refer to is unleavened bread - just as Christ used at the Last Supper.

FYI, the most anti-Catholics I know are ex-Catholics. They think they’ve been deceived. I have told you before and it silly to have to say it again, I’m not anti-Catholic. I question questionable and suspect doctrines when compared to the Bible. To start with, any group that says they are the only true ones seems to be a red flag. JESUS is the only One with all the correct answers.​

As for the cut and paste verses, it’s obvious that ‘woman’ refered to the woman being spoken of in context, Eve, as all the other times that Hebrew word was used. Sometimes it refers to a wife and translated so. Using your logic you called Mary the wife of Jesus, I guess.

 

[Dokimas]

When I refer to you as an anti-Catholic - it’s not out of acrimony - it’s just a fact.
Ask yourself honestly:
Whay am I on this Catholic forum? To have charitable dialogue or to push an agenda?
I think you’ll find the latter is true . . .​

It would appear you’re not here for charitable reasons then. Your agenda is a church.

 

[Dokimas]

Now - I asked you a simple question. If you can’t answer it, just say so.
I asked you to provide the names of these uterine brothers of Jesus.
CAN you?

Mt 13:55 "Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas?

 

[RickHolland]

My posts may be colorful - but never garbled.

Now - I asked you a simple question. If you can’t answer it, just say so.
I asked you to provide the names of these uterine brothers of Jesus.
CAN you?

Sorry, but I don’t play many games. At least you admit she gave birth to siblings; so now what do you do with the truth? Bury it or embrace it?

 

[Good_Fella]

Mary was a special woman. We can learn a lot from her if we pay attention to what she said and how she responded to the situations in her life. Outside Jesus, I think she is one of those we should look to as an example of how to respond when life throws us ‘curves’.

“Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
Luke 1, 42-43

“There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Ignatius of Antioch (c. A.D. 110)

Mary is the Mother of God, our Lord Jesus Christ. She is most blessed among women in virtue of her divine maternity and spiritual maternity as mother of us all in place of Eve, the fallen biological mother of humankind.

“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”
Luke 1, 45

“For as Eve was seduced by an angel to flee from God, having rebelled against His Word, so Mary by the word of an angel received the glad tidings that she would bear God by obeying His Word. The former was seduced to disobey God, but the latter was persuaded to obey God, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. As the human race was subjected to death through the act of a virgin, so it was saved by a virgin.”
Irenaeus (A.D. 180)

Mary’s faith working through love should certainly be modelled by anyone who wishes to be saved, but more importantly it made a vital contribution to our salvation by helping make it available to all who love God. Mary’s free and active collaboration with the Holy Spirit in the divine order of redemption was causative of our salvation in a secondary and dispositive manner in and through the redemptive merits of Christ. Mary was favoured with a privilege that was never granted to any other human being, and so she has merited for us in congruo proprie the gift of salvation. By modelling her perfect faith and love, we have cause to hope that we will be saved provided we persevere to the end.

Pax Christu :harp:

 

[RickHolland]

“Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
Luke 1, 42-43

“There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Ignatius of Antioch (c. A.D. 110)

Mary is the Mother of God, our Lord Jesus Christ. She is most blessed among women in virtue of her divine maternity and spiritual maternity as mother of us all in place of Eve, the fallen biological mother of humankind.

“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”
Luke 1, 45

“For as Eve was seduced by an angel to flee from God, having rebelled against His Word, so Mary by the word of an angel received the glad tidings that she would bear God by obeying His Word. The former was seduced to disobey God, but the latter was persuaded to obey God, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. As the human race was subjected to death through the act of a virgin, so it was saved by a virgin.”
Irenaeus (A.D. 180)

Mary’s faith working through love should certainly be modelled by anyone who wishes to be saved, but more importantly it made a vital contribution to our salvation by helping make it available to all who love God. Mary’s free and active collaboration with the Holy Spirit in the divine order of redemption was causative of our salvation in a secondary and dispositive manner in and through the redemptive merits of Christ. Mary was favoured with a privilege that was never granted to any other human being, and so she has merited for us in congruo proprie the gift of salvation. By modelling her perfect faith and love, we have cause to hope that we will be saved provided we persevere to the end.

Pax Christu :harp:

Is there apoint you are making here? Denying the word of God that Mary had other children? You highlighted “saved by a virgin”? Do you believe that the Bible teaches Mary as a savior or type of savior?

 

[CWBetts]

Is there apoint you are making here? Denying the word of God that Mary had other children? You highlighted “saved by a virgin”? Do you believe that the Bible teaches Mary as a savior or type of savior?

The Written Word of God never definitively said she had other children. The revealed Word of God from the magesterial authority of His Church says that she did not.

 

[adrift]

Mt 13:55 And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas?

Each one of these have been identified with other parents.

 

[Good_Fella]

-However, she was chosen out from among all of us. She was not better than we are. She was a sinner.

And coming to her he said, “Hail, favored one. The Lord is with you.”
Luke 1, 28

The expression “favoured one” expressed in the original Greek, kecharitomene (past-perfect-participle) refers to the Blessed Virgin Mary as the one “perfectly graced” or “completed by grace” (charis) with a permanent result from an indefinite time before the angel Gabriel appeared to her and said: “You have found favour with God” (Lk 1:30). St. Luke means to tell us that Mary was greeted as the one who was “full of grace”. St. Jerome understood the full meaning of the text when he translated the gospel from the Greek into Latin with the words gratia plena in his production of the Latin Vulgate version. No other human being other than the Mother of our Lord has ever been addressed, nor even merely described, as one “made perfect by grace” or “full of grace”. Stephen is described as one who is “filled with grace” ,pleres charitos, in the simple present tense (Acts 6:8). But his state of grace is rendered momentary, unlike Mary’s which was constant and permanent in virtue of her divine maternity. The martyr’s state of grace does not constitute one that encompasses his entire existence: past, present, and future.

Since Mary was in a state of sanctifying and habitual grace all her life, she was sinless. She never fell from God’s grace at any moment in her life, so she was perpetually sinless and in God’s favour. Grace is the “antidote to sin”, St. Paul teaches us. Meanwhile St. Luke typifies the Blessed Virgin Mary as a type of pure and undefiled ark of the Covenant in his Infancy Narrative by drawing on the Scriptures in the Second Book of Samuel. He perceived Mary as sinless from the very first instant God created her by fashioning her soul. Original sin entails the absence of sanctifying grace. Not only was Mary personally sinless, but God made her sinless in nature so that she would be a worthy mother of his Only-begotten Son.

“Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled, but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin.”
St. Ambrose (A.D. 388)

Pax Christu :harp:

 

[Good_Fella]

…Have you ever looked at the Scriptures telling us how Jesus interacted with Mary? At least twice her, speaking to her, called her woman not mother (or mom). Once when He was brought news that His mothers and brothers had come to see Him, He responded saying, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it."

“I will put enmity between you and the woman.”
Genesis 3, 15

Jesus may have addressed Mary “Mother” during his hidden life with her while subjected to her in accord with Mosaic law. But once he began his ministry, by performing his first miracle at the wedding feast in Cana upon his blessed mother’s request, he honourably addressed her in allusion to her powerful mediatory role of the new Eve. Our Lord certainly acknowledged his mother’s spiritual motherhood of humankind when he presented her to the disciple at the foot of the cross by calling her Woman (Jn 19:26-27; Rev 12:17).

“This mother, when alone, had not milk, because alone she was not a woman. But she is once virgin and mother – pure as a virgin, loving as a mother. And calling her children to her, she nurses them with holy milk, viz., the Word for childhood.”
St. Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 202)

"For if Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus, and yet Jesus says to his mother, ’ Woman, behold thy son,’ and not ‘Behold you have this son also,’ then He virtually said to her, ‘Lo, this is Jesus, whom thou didst bear.’ Is it not the case that everyone who is perfect lives himself no longer, but Christ lives in him; and if Christ lives in him, then it is said of him to Mary, ‘Behold, thy son Christ.’ "
Origen (A.D. 232)​

Maybe Jesus knew that people would one day misunderstand Mary’s role and make her out to be a person not intended by God.

 

[Good_Fella]

Is there apoint you are making here? Denying the word of God that Mary had other children? You highlighted “saved by a virgin”? Do you believe that the Bible teaches Mary as a savior or type of savior?

I hate to repeat myself so often, so if you wish, read my articles They Have No Wine and Behold the Handmaid of the Lord at my site: www.justinangel.st.blogs.com for the answers to your questions regarding Mary’s free and active involvement in God’s plan of salvation. And you may want to read How Shall This Be? with regard to the Perpetual Virginity of Mary.

It’s about time you become more familiar with God’s revelations by focussing on his deeds made manifest in the Sacred Tradition of the Church.

PAX :harp:

 

[Dokimas]

Each one of these have been identified with other parents.

Where? Remember, at least a couple of these names were quite common.

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas;5667980:

…Have you ever looked at the Scriptures telling us how Jesus interacted with Mary? At least twice her, speaking to her, called her woman not mother

(or mom). Once when He was brought news that His mothers and brothers had come to see Him, He responded saying, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it."

“I will put enmity between you and the woman.”
Genesis 3, 15

Jesus may have addressed Mary “Mother” during his hidden life with her while subjected to her in accord with Mosaic law. But once he began his ministry, by performing his first miracle at the wedding feast in Cana upon his blessed mother’s request, he honourably addressed her in allusion to her powerful mediatory role of the new Eve. Our Lord certainly acknowledged his mother’s spiritual motherhood of humankind when he presented her to the disciple at the foot of the cross by calling her Woman (Jn 19:26-27; Rev 12:17).

“This mother, when alone, had not milk, because alone she was not a woman. But she is once virgin and mother – pure as a virgin, loving as a mother. And calling her children to her, she nurses them with holy milk, viz., the Word for childhood.”
St. Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 202)

"For if Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus, and yet Jesus says to his mother, ’ Woman, behold thy son,’ and not ‘Behold you have this son also,’ then He virtually said to her, ‘Lo, this is Jesus, whom thou didst bear.’ Is it not the case that everyone who is perfect lives himself no longer, but Christ lives in him; and if Christ lives in him, then it is said of him to Mary, ‘Behold, thy son Christ.’ "
Origen (A.D. 232)​

“From now on all ages will call me blessed.”
Luke 1, 48

There is nothing blessed about being used by God and coerced by him to serve as a passive instrument in the Hypostatic order of redemption.

“The Almighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name.”
Luke 1, 49

God has exalted Mary. We glorify Him by honouring and venerating his handmaid.

Mary has said: “Do whatever he tells you” (Jn 2:5). And our Lord has said: “Honour thy mother.”

Pax Christu :harp:​

You all really know your churches teachings, I’ll give you that. I just don’t see it matching up Scripture with Scripture, though. You teach one thing and the Bible teaches something different.

 

[CWBetts]

Good Fella;5776937:

You all really know your churches teachings, I’ll give you that. I just don’t see it matching up Scripture with Scripture, though. You teach one thing and the Bible teaches something different.

The Church’s teaching is consistent with Scripture. Simply because you do not see the congruity does not make the Church wrong. To suggest the Church, who is guided by the Holy Spirit into the fullness of truth (John 16:13, 1 Timothy 3:15) is wrong because you, as an individual, have not yet been given the graces to see the Truth is nothing short of self-worship. The Holy Scriptures are gift from God, and though the basic pillars of the faith are simple to understand, the deeper meaning of Scriptures is fully revealed only to the Church, who then teaches the faithful. This is why the Church is given teaching authority. You have denied said authority, and are attempting to make the Scriptures say what you wish them to say. You are doing more than making yourself your own Pope. You are trying to make yourself into God. What else would you say about one who attempts to take away authority given by God, who tires to take away from the holiest human being whoever has, and whoever will, walk the face of the earth, denies two of the three categories of divine revelation, and of the one category he does accept, tries to change it?

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas;5777347:

The Church’s teaching is consistent with Scripture. Simply because you do not see the congruity does not make the Church wrong. To suggest the Church, who is guided by the Holy Spirit into the fullness of truth (John 16:13, 1 Timothy 3:15) is wrong because you, as an individual, have not yet been given the graces to see the Truth is nothing short of self-worship. The Holy Scriptures are gift from God, and though the basic pillars of the faith are simple to understand, the deeper meaning of Scriptures is fully revealed only to the Church, who then teaches the faithful. This is why the Church is given teaching authority. You have denied said authority, and are attempting to make the Scriptures say what you wish them to say. You are doing more than making yourself your own Pope. You are trying to make yourself into God. What else would you say about one who attempts to take away authority given by God, who tires to take away from the holiest human being whoever has, and whoever will, walk the face of the earth, denies two of the three categories of divine revelation, and of the one category he does accept, tries to change it?

Could I not say to you that just because you don’t see what some of us are trying to tell you, doesn’t make it wrong?​

If I haven’t been given the grace to see it your way, then it’s not my fault.​

The Church is made up of fallible people so it can’t be 100% correct. Guess what? That’s not a big deal for God. He knows our frame and it’s but dust. He knows we are all sinners prone to mistake. He and He alone is able to deal with it so that His Gospel will go forth.